Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Raghubir MandalversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to a bond of Rs.10,000 and two sureties, under Section 438(2) CrPC and Section 482(2) B.N.S.S.

Summary

The petitioner, Raghubir Mandal, sought anticipatory bail in a case registered as C.A. No. 417 of 2022 alleging offences under Sections 376 and 506 of the IPC for rape and criminal intimidation. He contended that the complaint was false, arising from a long-standing land dispute and that he had a clean antecedent, having been acquitted in a prior case. The State opposed the bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the allegations. The court noted that the police had submitted a final report but the magistrate had taken cognizance of the offence, and considered the background of multiple litigations. Weighing the facts, the court ordered that the petitioner be released on anticipatory bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions under Section 438(2) CrPC and Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.

Issues considered

  • Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 CrPC and Section 482 B.N.S.S. in view of the allegations of rape and criminal intimidation
  • Whether the allegations are false and stem from a land dispute, affecting the grant of bail
  • Impact of the police final report and the magistrate's cognizance on the bail application
  • Effect of the petitioner's prior acquittal and clean antecedent on the bail decision

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • rape
  • criminal intimidation
  • Section 376 IPC
  • Section 506 IPC
  • Section 438 CrPC
  • Section 482 B.N.S.S.
  • land dispute
  • false complaint
  • bail conditions

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32735 of 2025
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-417 Year-2022 Thana- KATIHAR COMPLAINT CASE
                                                      District- Katihar
                 ======================================================
                 Raghubir Mandal S/o Late Fulo Mandal Resident of Village- Harinkol, Post-
                 Bishanpur, Police Station- Barari(Semapur), District- Katihar

                                                                              ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                     Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar
           2.    Budhiya Devi W/o Arjun Mandal Resident of Village- Harinkol, Police
                 Station- Barari(Semapur), District- Katihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :     Mr.Rajendra Prasad Sah, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :     Mr.Anish Chandra, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
                                       ORAL ORDER

6   08-01-2026               Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                             2. The accused-petitioner, named in the F.I.R., is

                   apprehending his arrest in connection with C.A. No. 417 of

                   2022 registered for the offences punishable under Sections

                   376 & 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

                             3. The allegation against the petitioner is to commit

                   rape upon the complainant/informant.

                             4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

                   petitioner submitted that a complaint petition was filed before

                   the learned C.J.M., Katihar bearing No. 620/2016 on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32735 of 2025(6) dt.08-01-2026
                                            2/4




          28.03.2016 by this petitioner, where Dilip Mandal was one of

          the accused. It is submitted that another criminal complaint

          was already lodged in the year 2009 bearing No. 2338/2009,

          where Shiv Pujan Mandal and Mahendra Mandal, who are the

          inquiry witnesses of this case was made accused by this

          petitioner.

                   5. In this context, it is further submitted that Arun

          Kapri, who is another inquiry witness of the case, against

          whom the petitioner already initiated money suit which is

          pending before the court below as Money Suit No. 03/2021.

                   6. It is submitted that police, after investigation,

          submitted final form against the petitioner and did not sent up

          him for facing trial, but the learned jurisdictional Magistrate

          differing with the police report took cognizance against the

          petitioner for the offence under section 376 of the I.P.C.

                   7. Arguing further, it is submitted that in view of land

          dispute and previous pending litigations, as discussed

          aforesaid, apparently the present                    case, which, upon

          investigation, found false, have no substance. Explaining

          criminal antecedent of the petitioner, it is submitted that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32735 of 2025(6) dt.08-01-2026
                                            3/4




          petitioner was accused in Barari P.S. Case No. 70/2005,

          where after facing trial, he was acquitted and as such, he is a

          man of clean antecedent.

                   8. It appears from the record that notice was validly

          served upon opposite party no. 2 in terms of order dated

          19.05.2025,          but     non-appeared            on   behalf   of   the

          victim/opposite party no. 2.

                   9. Learned A.P.P. for the State, while opposing the

          prayer of anticipatory bail of the petitioner, submitted that

          allegation is specific against the petitioner, but he could not

          disputed the aforesaid factual submission regarding previous

          enmity in the background of land dispute.

                   10. In view of aforesaid factual submission and by

          taking note of the fact as allegation raised in the background

          of multiple land dispute for which different complaint cases as

          well as money suit are pending between the parties, coupled

          with the fact that police after investigation submitted final

          form against the petitioner and did not sent up him for facing

          trial, accordingly, above-named petitioner, in the event of his

          arrest/surrender within a period of four weeks from this
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32735 of 2025(6) dt.08-01-2026
                                                       4/4




                     order, is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing of bail

                     bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand only) with two sureties of

                     the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial

                     Magistrate - 1st Class, Katihar/concerned court in connection

                     with C.A. No. 417 of 2022, subject to the conditions as laid

                     down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C/Section 482(2) of

                     the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (in short “B.N.S.S.”).


                                                                   (Chandra Shekhar Jha, J)
Rajeev/-

U      T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.